[IAEP] [Sugar-devel] Add Fedora logo to Sugar

[Tomeu Vizoso]

On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 1:45 PM, Jonas Smedegaard <dr at jones.dk> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 11:37:57AM +0100, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 7:02 PM, Ed McNierney <ed at laptop.org> wrote:
>>> Tomeu -
>>>
>>> Hi - thanks for bringing this up.  Trac #8767 covers OLPC's agreement
>>> with Red Hat regarding the identification of OLPC's XO bundled
>>> software.  The proposed identifications are to provide boot-time
>>> "Fedora remix" graphics on the XO.  It says nothing one way or the
>>> other about non-OLPC Sugar distributions that may or may not contain
>>> packages derived from Fedora. This ticket is specific to the XO;
>>> other Sugar distributions should decide what their preferences and
>>> requirements are for various logo/brand identification.  Presumably
>>> those requirements might vary from one distribution to another.
>>>
>>> I hope this helps - please let me know if there are more questions
>>> about this specific Trac ticket.  Thanks!
>>
> >From the OLPC side, I think this is all well clear. Though my question
>>was rather for other distributors of Sugar, in case they wanted to put
>>their brand in Sugar.
>>
>>I can see how Debian would like for example to place their logo and
>>distro version in the control panel, and I personally think that if
>>all distros could agree, would be nice to do so in a way that involves
>>just placing some icons and perhaps text files somewhere on disk.
>
> I find it nice that Sugarlabs as upstream care about ways generally for
> distributors to add branding (initiated by specific branding need by one
> distributor (OLPC and its main contributor (Redhat).
>
>  From a distributor point of view it is of course nice to be able to
> advertise/promote itself throughout the system.
>
>  From a user point of view it also makes sense to recognize what
> environment she is working in. I believe, however, that if the
> environment is the same across distros then it is more cunfusing than
> helping to emphasize the distro.
>
> Users might benefit more from emphasizing the initial package collection
> than how it was bootstrapped - e.g. "Peru Sugar", "Sucrose", "Custom
> mix" or something.
>
> The classic unobtrusive place for authors to promote themselves is an
> "About" box. I would find it most elegant if Sugar made it easy for
> distributors to promote themselves similarly unobtrusive.
>
> Distributors can still do whatever branding they want (as long as not
> violating any licenses, trademarks, local laws etc.), but I dislike
> Sugarlabs encouraging too invasive advertising - similarly as I would
> dislike a movie player that made it easy to squeeze in advertisements
> each 5 minutes.
>
> Debian has as a declared goal to serve (not to entertain) its users.

Perhaps I explained myself badly, but I was proposing that distros
would place their branding inside a control panel section, what now is
called "About my XO" and that would be renamed to something like
"About my computer".

Does it sound sufficiently unobtrusive?

I do see some value in users having some knowledge about which linux
distribution the software they are using is based on. Perhaps won't
matter to 90% of users, but that 10% that does care about it can make
a very big difference for good.

Regards,

Tomeu